Task Force on General Studies Review

I. APPOINTMENT AND ORGANIZATION OF THE TASK
FORCE

The Task Force on General Studies Review
was established in January of 1996. Seventeen persons were
appointed to the Task Force by Dr. Barbara Haskew, Provost and
Vice President for Academic Affairs. The group includes two
students, ten faculty members from diverse disciplines, three
department chairs, the Associate Dean of the College of
Education, and the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts.
Included among the faculty members are the president-elect of
the MTSU Faculty Senate and two persons who have recently
chaired the university standing committee that oversees the
general education program. The Associate Vice President for
Academic Affairs and the Director of the Office of
Institutional Effectiveness and Research are ex officio
members. A complete roster of members with their academic
assignments is attached as Appendix A.

The initial meeting of the Task Force took
place in February, 1996. Dr. Robert Jones, Associate Vice
President for Academic Affairs, charged the group with pursuing
these major goals:

Organize and administer a thorough
internal review of the quality of the general education
program.

Coordinate an external review of the
general education program by appropriate higher education
scholars from institutions outside the state of
Tennessee.

As part of the internal review, examine
all relevant aspects of the general education program,
including mission and purpose, course components,
administration and organization, assessment, and use of
assessment data for improvement.

Provide to the Provost and Vice
President for Academic Affairs a written report, due in
June of 1997, which summarizes the internal and external
review conclusions, and provide any recommendations
developed by the Task Force from those reviews.

To carry out its charge, the Task Force
adopted and followed a working calendar with a schedule of
monthly meetings and strategic agendas, gathered and reviewed a
number of relevant documents relating to general education among
Tennessee and out-of-state institutions, gathered and reviewed a
number of publications dealing with general education issues,
prepared and executed an extensive plan of data and opinion
gathering among groups of diverse university constituents,
facilitated a thorough review of the university's general
education program by two nationally-prominent general education
scholars, engaged in workshops and extensive group deliberations,
encouraged campus-wide participation in and review of the overall
process, and prepared this final report.

A copy of the Task Force's calendar is attached as Appendix B.
Documents and publications reviewed by the group appear in
Appendix C. Representatives of the Task Force conducted sixty
focus groups with university freshmen, juniors and seniors,
honors students, faculty from each academic department, general
open faculty meetings, alumni, and mid-state employers of
university graduates. From these meetings, the Task Force
compiled a booklet summarizing the group responses regarding the
nature and philosophy of general education, learning outcome
expectations for a quality general education program, judgments
about the quality of the current university general education
program, judgments about the skills and knowledge demonstrated by
recent university graduates, and suggestions for improving the
university's current program. Information from the documents that
were reviewed, responses from the focus groups, and the
suggestions and conclusions provided by the outside reviewers
were primary components in the Task Force's deliberations which
led to the final conclusions in this report.

II. EXTERNAL REVIEW

The external review took place on November
14-16,1996, and was conducted by Dr. John Hinni, Dean of the
School of University Studies at Southeast Missouri State
University and recent president of the national Council for
Administration of General and Liberal Studies; and Dr. Fred
Hinson, Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and
Director of General Education at Western Carolina University.
Following the review, Drs. Hinni and Hinson provided to the
Task Force a narrative summary of their conclusions and
recommendations, and completed the TBR
Review of General Education- Evaluators' Summary Report. These two documents are
attached as Appendices D and E.

Overall, the outside reviewers' conclusions
about the university's general education program were extremely
positive. On the
Evaluators' Summary Report, they concluded that the
university meets eighteen of the twenty program objectives
including the summary objective which states that the "program
meets or exceeds the minimum standards of good practice." The
two program objectives where shortcomings were noted were the
need to review the curriculum regularly and the need to review
student learning outcomes regularly for planning. The narrative
report was also very positive with particular emphasis on the
overwhelming satisfaction expressed by students with the
current program. However, the reviewers did use the narrative
to provide a number of recommendations that in their judgment
would improve the current program in some significant ways.
Important suggestions for improvement included (1) create an
ongoing review process; (2) use student learning outcome data
in an ongoing review process; (3) inform students more
effectively about the role of general education within the
undergraduate curriculum; (4) create an administrative position
so that someone will take charge of the program, create a
campus-wide dialogue on general education and generally oversee
the pursuit of a variety of improvements in general education
review, evaluation, and planning; (5) develop an upper-level,
interdisciplinary experience for students that would more
effectively integrate knowledge and skills from several
disciplines; and (6) improve the role and oversight activity of
the university standing committee charged with coordination of
the general education program.

III. TASK FORCE REVIEW (Internal
Review)

General Overview

The MTSU General Studies Program is an
effective general education curriculum following a traditional
"distributive" approach that includes required and elective
courses providing students with important skills and knowledge
from a variety of disciplines. Developed in the 1970s, the
program was initially well conceived and structured and has
served the institution and its students effectively for more
than two decades. Though perhaps not extremely innovative for
the 1990s, the program is similar to approaches taken by many
institutions across the country, particularly larger
institutions; and the program is similar in many ways to
programs offered at most TBR and UT institutions. Over the
years faculty members appear to have been generally supportive
of the program and few major changes have been proposed in the
past. Likewise, students, when asked, have expressed general
approval of the program. Recent surveys, ACT- COMP opinion
data, and interviews with students and faculty indicate
continued general support for the program. Those persons -
primarily faculty - who do suggest changes usually support
proposals that do not amount to major changes in the program's
general approach or structure. Very significantly, the primary
general education outcome measure used by the university - the
ACT-COMP (a nationally -normed test designed specifically to
measure general education learning) consistently yields
positive data for the university's graduating seniors. All MTSU
graduates must take the ACT-COMP and they consistently score
above the national norm.

The General Studies Program mission is
consistent with and flows clearly from the university mission.
The program is presented clearly in the undergraduate catalog.
The mission statement addresses appropriate skills and
knowledge, and is implemented through a variety of diverse and
broad course selections. Component courses were designed
initially to be broad-based introductions to disciplines and to
be taught to a general university population. However,
judgments among Task Force members differ as to whether or not
this continues to be the best approach in today's
technologically-oriented, interdisciplinary world.

The review and evaluation of the component
courses is currently left up to the host departments. This has
the advantage of having faculty directly involved with each
course responsible for its ongoing evaluation and updating. The
disadvantage of this approach, however, is that there is no
centralized perspective used to evaluate and update component
courses and their content a weakness that appears to limit the
university's ability to make overall program changes and
improvements.

Although the program has not been
significantly amended since the 1970s, several important new
courses and course-options have been added. However, some of
these changes came either from outside mandates or from
non-policy based internal changes. There appears to be no
clearly defined means of introducing new courses, deleting
current courses, or making other needed changes. Indeed, even
the question of what exactly constitutes a General Studies
component course is one for which the university has no precise
answer. As requirements for graduation from Tennessee secondary
schools change and as the university's student population
changes, the institution now and in the immediate future will
need to address these important issues.

Though perhaps also accounting for some
program weaknesses, much of the strength of the current General
Studies Program is found in the decentralized nature of the
structure. Academic departments and their faculties take great
interest in their general education offerings, review their
courses, evaluate instruction and instructors, participate in
faculty and instructional development projects, and are
generally committed to making general education a quality
component of the undergraduate experience at MTSU. It is common
to find many of the university's most dedicated and gifted
teachers teaching General Studies courses. And the university
rightly takes pride in its commitment to general education.
However, the lack of a clearly defined, readily assessable and
centrally governed general education philosophy and perspective
tends to minimize communication among the host departments of
component courses and to mitigate against a cohesive,
integrated program.

The primary conclusion of the Task Force,
similar to the conclusion of the outside reviewers, is that
MTSU currently provides undergraduates with an appropriate,
quality program in general education, but a program that is in
need of some significant updating and improvement.

Recommendations for Improvement

Despite a favorable review of the General
Studies Program and a positive conclusion about the program's
overall quality, the Task Force concluded that there are,
nevertheless, important ways that the current program could be
significantly improved. To improve the program and to insure
that its quality is maintained and enhanced, the Task Force
unanimously presents the following ten recommendations:

1. The university should establish an administrative
position with responsibility for general education.
General Studies represents thirty-three percent of each
student's undergraduate experience and is a major university
priority. Because of these factors, general education needs a
specific advocate who will take responsibility for the ongoing
well-being of the program. This position would be responsible
for maintaining an ongoing campus-wide dialogue on general
education, communicating effectively with all campus
constituencies - especially students - about the role and
purpose of general education in the undergraduate curriculum,
providing leadership in developing ongoing programs and
structures for regular review of courses and student outcomes
and for the use of outcome data for systematic improvement in
the program, and providing leadership for program change and
improvement as needed. Creating this administrative position is
a foundational recommendation upon which the following
additional recommendations are based.

2. The university should reestablish a committee
devoted exclusively to the General Studies Program.
This new, university standing committee should reflect broad
representation for the entire university community. The
standing committee together with the administrative director of
the program should provide leadership that incorporates and
takes advantage of the long-standing commitment to general
education found in the contributing academic departments.

3. The director and the standing committee should
establish an ongoing, structured program to review the
general education mission statement, the mission statement
goals, program courses, course syllabi, course learning
outcomes, and the relationships among all of these program
components.

4. The director and the standing committee should
establish an ongoing, structured program to use review data,
particularly student learning outcome data, for planning and
improvement of the General Studies Program.

5. The director and the standing committee should
establish a structure and policy that allows for orderly and
efficient changes in the General Studies Program.
Currently, there is no clear policy for amending, improving, or
otherwise changing the program.

6. The director and the standing committee together
with colleges and academic departments should explore the
idea of developing an integrative and/or capstone experience
as a part of the General Studies Program.

7. The General Studies Mission statement should be
revised to provide greater clarity and to incorporate
additional learning objectives. The Task Force
presents the following example as a revised mission statement
containing additional objectives:

General education experiences at MTSU
should emphasize that which is common to all people, that
which everyone should have in order to live as an aware and
responsible member of a contemporary free society. All
undergraduates should attain the following objectives:

Proficiency in oral and written
communications and in mathematical and problem-solving
skills;

Ability to test their attitudes,
values, and ideas in a rational manner and to use various
methods of inquiry to increase their own knowledge and
understanding;

Broad and integrated knowledge of the
natural sciences, the social sciences, the humanities and
fine arts, and computer technology; and,

Ability as responsible state,
national, and global citizens to contribute positively to
a culturally diverse society and to nurture effectively
their own mental and physical well-being.

The general objectives in this - an
alternative, revised mission statement - should be further
developed where possible with very specific learning objectives
which can be assessed. The goals in the mission statement and
the more specific learning objectives should be the criteria
used in evaluating regularly all component courses within the
General Studies Program.

8. While retaining the mandated ACT-COMP test, the
director, the standing committee, and the faculty from academic
departments should search for and/or develop other assessment
measures that will provide more meaningful and useful learning
outcome data for planning and improving the program.
In particular, the assessment instruments should be
continuously applied on a routine basis, and be used to
determine if component courses are satisfying general education
course criteria. The results of these assessments should be
provided to instructors and departments for course changes and
improvements, and to determine if courses which no longer meet
the criteria should be withdrawn. This ongoing procedure should
allow the general education program to evolve naturally as the
university and its student population changes.

9. As a part of a newly developed overall evaluation
and assessment program, the General Studies director and
standing committee should address a number of concerns cited by
students, faculty, alumni, and or employers as potential
weaknesses in the current program. Some of the
concerns to be addressed are:

more challenging, "hands-on" instruction
in computer technology;

more attention to effective oral and
written communication, with a special concern about
acceptable grammar;

more concern with personal ethics and
responsibility;

more emphasis on wellness/fitness and
less on current physical education activity courses;

more emphasis on critical thinking and
problem- solving;

more instruction on personal financial
management and other similar life skills;

more options for course selection,
particularly among the natural and life sciences and in
history;

and a greater emphasis on developing
among students a global or multi-cultural perspective that
would create within them a greater appreciation of domestic
and international diversity.

10. A blue ribbon committee with broad representation
from across the university, including representation from the
current Task Force, should be formed to screen candidates and
to recommend outstanding applicants for the director of General
Studies.The blue ribbon committee should also oversee the
implementation of the other structural changes recommended by
the Task Force. Once the director, a new General
Studies Committee, and a new structure for evaluation and
change are in place, the blue ribbon committee should be
dissolved, and the task of ongoing oversight should be left to
the director and the standing committee.

Finally, while the Task Force believes that
the current general education program at MTSU meets acceptable
quality standards, it also believes that the program could be
substantially improved. The recommendations should be adopted as
soon as possible. It is also the position of the Task Force that
these recommendations should become part of the university's
academic master plan and that the addition of a director together
with structural changes that will facilitate ongoing improvements
in the program should be fully implemented by the year 2000.

Organizational meeting
Review of General Studies at MTSU Review of Task Force charge
Approval of tentative list of issues to address

APRIL 96

Presentation and workshop by Dr. John Henni
Discussion of tentative working calendar

MAY 96

Final approval of working calendar
Approve data gathering instruments
Circulate publication on trends and innovations in general
education
Examine and discuss MTSU's General Studies program compared to
other TBR & UT institutions' programs.
Identify Issues of Concern

Discuss & finalize plans for outside
reviewers
Circulate publications on trends and innovations in general
education
Examine & discuss MTSU mission statement, General Studies
mission statement, five distribution areas, and component courses
in each distribution area
Review all current assessment data
Discuss relationships among assessment instruments and the
General Studies mission statement, the five component areas, and
the component courses
Identify issues of Concern

JULY 96

Circulate publications on trends and
innovations in general education Continue discussion from June
meeting
Identify issues of Concern

SEPTEMBER 96

Circulate publications on trends and
innovations in general education Continue discussion from
June/July meetings
Identify issues of Concern

Review the Role and Scope of the Committee on
Admissions, Standards, and General Studies Review the
Organization and Administration of the General Studies Program
Begin review of data from focus groups
Identify issues of Concern

Florida Board of Regents.
Survey on Credit Hours Required for Baccalaureate Degrees -
National Public institutions. Florida Board of Regents,
August 1995.

Forrest, Aubrey (ed.).
Good Practices in General Education. The American
College Testing Program, 1986.

Forrest, Aubrey and A Study Group on
Portfolio Assessment, Time Will Tell - Portfolio-Assisted
Assessment of General Education. Washington: D.C.: The AAHE
Assessment Forum, American Association for Higher Education,
1990.

Meacham, Jack.
Assessing General Education, A Questionnaire to initiate
Campus Conversations. Washington, D.C.: Network for
Academic Renewal, Association for American Colleges and
Universities, no date.

Task Group on General Education.
A New Vitality in General Education - Planning, Teaching,
and Supporting Effective Liberal Learning. Washington,
D.C.: Association of American Colleges, 1988.

Yarbrough, Donald. "Some Lessons To Be
Learned From A Decade of General Education Outcomes Assessment
With the ACT COMP Measures." San Francisco, CA: Paper Presented
at the Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional
Research, May 1991.

"Year-end Report of the Activities of the
Admissions, Standards, and General Studies Committee for the
1994-95 Academic Year," unpublished committee report,
1995.

"Year-end Report of the Activities of the
General Studies Committee for the 1993-94 Academic Year,"
unpublished committee report, 1994.

APPENDIX DNarrative for Middle Tennessee Review

BACKGROUND

Dr. John Hinni, Dean,
School of University Studies, Southeast Missouri State University
and Dr. Fred Hinson, Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic
Affairs and Director of General Education, Western Carolina
University served as external reviewers of the General Studies
Program at Middle Tennessee State University on 13-15 November
1996. Conditions of the visit included the following:

Wednesday, 13 November
1996: There was an initial meeting with Jim Brooks, Chair of the
Task Force on General Studies Review and Betty D. Johnson,
Director of Institutional Effectiveness and Research. This
meeting reviewed the charge to the reviewers and the agenda of
the visit. We had previously reviewed a total of fourteen
documents related to the General Studies Program at Middle
Tennessee State including the 1995-1997 undergraduate catalog.

Thursday, 14 November
1996: Meetings were held with the Provost and Academic Vice
President, Dr. Barbara Haskew and Associate Vice President, Dr.
Robert Jones, a total of seven task force members in three
sessions, two faculty members not associated with the task force,
and three college deans separately.

Friday, 15 November 1996:
Meetings were conducted with the chair of the General Studies
Committee, five task force members in two sessions, two student
members of the task force, numerous spontaneously arranged
conversations with students at random, and an exit meeting with
the task force.

We noted from the written
materials reviewed that the University had successfully completed
a SACS evaluation in 1994, that the General Studies program was
implemented in 1976 and has undergone very Little change since
that time, that the goals of the program as listed on page 48 of
the University Bulletin are appropriate and consistent with
institutional mission, and that students report on ACT COMP that
they are satisfied with their experiences at the University. Our
interviews convinced us that administrators and some faculty
believe that the General Studies program is strong and that only
minor "tinkering" is in order. Other faculty believe that a major
revision is in order. We believe that the objectives and goals of
the program should be reviewed since the program is twenty years
old. This would provide the opportunity to identify and address
any problems.

RECOMMENDATIONS :

The enclosed Evaluator's
Summary Report contains 19 items of review in five categories. As
a result of our findings we agree that all but two items are
adequately met by the General Studies program at Middle Tennessee
State. Following are recommendations and comments resulting from
our review and our utilization of the summary report.

I. Role and Scope:

We believe that the
General Studies program at Middle Tennessee State University is
consistent with institutional mission and that outcome objectives
are clearly stated.

II. Curriculum:

We also believe that the
curriculum is appropriate to the level of the program, that
courses do go beyond basic skills and there is evidence that
cocurricular enrichment opportunities exist. However, there is no
evidence that the General Studies program is regularly reviewed.
Accordingly, we recommend that an ongoing review process should
be created.

III. Faculty:

We believe that faculty
are well-prepared for the program as it presently exists, that
SACS Criteria have been met, that development opportunities are
available and utilized and that the student faculty ratio is
appropriate.

IV. Teaching and Learning Environment:

We are of the opinion that
instruction is regularly evaluated, that students make timely
progress through the program, and that the opinions of every
student and those of graduates are regularly collected. Further,
ACT COMP summary data indicate overwhelming student satisfaction
with their undergraduate experience. Library holdings appear to
be adequate for general education, at least marginally. We also
believe that Student Learning Outcomes are not reviewed, hence
general education outcomes are not used in planning which
coincides with the absence of a review process mentioned above.
We recommend that general education objectives be reviewed in
light of student learning outcomes. Further, there is little
evidence of "connections" between and among courses in the
program, hence General Studies at Middle Tennessee State is more
a collection of courses rather than a program. Creating central
objectives based upon student learning outcomes would serve to
"connect" courses and provide a basis for assessing student
learning outcomes in general education

We also found that
classrooms, laboratories and other facilities are adequate to
support the program and that students are appropriately served in
terms of computer literacy.

V. Student Advisement:

We are of the opinion that
general education requirements and objectives are clearly stated
in the catalog, that students receive adequate advisement and
since a degree audit program was recently implemented the
academic progress of students is routinely monitored. We also
believe that some means must be designed to inform students about
the role of general education in the undergraduate curriculum. We
were unable to find any student who knew what the program was
about. Apparently the only way students learn about general
education is through their own initiative reading the two pages
devoted to the General Studies program in the catalog or during
orientation when some deans describe the offerings briefly. The
Freshmen Seminar which is not required of all students except
Business could be used to introduce and explain the General
Studies program. A separate General Studies handbook could be
developed and distributed to all students. Interestingly, the
students we interviewed indicated a high level of satisfaction
with their undergraduate experience in spite of a lack of
information about General Studies.

VI. Other:

In addition to the above,
we further recommend that the institution create an
administrative position with responsibility for general
education. Having "someone in charge of general education" would
solve a large number of problems at Middle Tennessee State. For
example, an administrator could be responsible for the creation
of a campus dialogue concerning general education which is
essential to reduce the stresses associated with any future
changes in the program, ensuring that this dialogue leads to
systematic program evaluation, developing student learning
outcomes in program objectives, creating course approval
procedures designed to relate to program goals and objectives,
ensuring that students have appropriate information about the
program, monitoring student progress through the program,
providing for appropriate cocurricular initiatives, and
promulgating current national and regional general education
information to the university community.

We also believe it is
appropriate for the university to consider developing a capstone
experience in general education for students, perhaps of an
interdisciplinary nature. The present program lacks any
integrative experience for students and is largely lower-level,
hence students and faculty alike view General Studies as
something to be "gotten out of the way," or as introductory to
selected majors. Given the rate at which new information is
created is seems hopeless to continue to pursue programs that in
large measure introduce the subject matter of selected
disciplines to the exclusion of others.

Faculty were confused
about the role of the Task Force which reviews the merit and
philosophy of general studies and the Admissions, Standards and
General Studies Committee which reviews the program and proposed
changes. The Admissions, Standards and General Studies Committee
has not been very active overseeing the program. This committee
should be very active to keep the program updated. All courses
should be evaluated and reviewed periodically based on the
objectives of the program and be related to student learning and
outcomes. This will help keep the program current and viable.

There are several parts of
the program that must be coordinated and addressed on a
day-to-day basis. Therefore it is essential to have an
administrative position with responsibility for the general
studies program which is required of every student that graduates
from Middle Tennessee State University.